Has the defense created reasonable doubt?

[shadowraiths]

Imo, the defense is all over the place... from their odd story about RK to the molestation allegations. Seems like they're throwing spaghetti at the wall hoping something will stick. Otherwise put, their story does not cohese.

Then again, am not sure the prosecution's story will cohese either. After all, the ME was unable to determine CoD. And even KC's lies do not really provide a clear view wrt motive. That is, the two prongs that must be met for a 1st degree murder conviction (actus reus and mens rea... guilty act and guilty mind, respectively).

Now throw in all of the faux pas that have occurred throughout this case, to include but not limited to the foreign DNA on the duct tape. And, well?

 

[shadowraiths]

Where does 31 days, lies, tattoo, and partying fit into the textbook Stages of Grief?

Denial.

 

[pufnstuf]

To answer the OP question... NO, and once rebuttal is done, there won't be any room for reasonable doubt.

 

[martea]

The only reasonable doubt I have is why Jose Baez would not realize he is in way over his head and someone's life is at stake here.

 

[MustlyLurking]

The defense CIC is even more unbelievable than the kidnapping story that ICA gave the detectives. JB has done a very poor job of presenting the story, so far. He has over-promised and under-delivered. Unless JB pulls it all together and knocks one out of the park in the closing statement, ICA will become CMCA (convicted murderer CA).

JB's OS said the defense would present an alternative explanation, and that painting that has not yet been painted. His painting is the equivalent of three or four dots on a blank sheet of paper. The dots are not connected. There is no shape or color. It presents no image. Does he think the jury will forget that he said there would be a picture?

The defense has, also, been completely devoid of strategy. JB has wasted many hours presenting nothing. He found a few trivial inconsistencies in statements here and there. But, none of these compensate for the avalanche of damning evidence against ICA. The only reasonable doubt I see here, is if JB will go to jail for contempt when this is all over. And, if he is not dis-barred, will anyone ever be desperate enough to make his phone ring again.

 

[MustlyLurking]

One more thought... If ICA takes the stand, she will be doing the equivalent of sticking the needle in her own arm. IMO Then doubt will not be a factor, and JB will be off the hook, until HHJBP cleans his clock!

 

[katydid23]

I do think there is plenty of reasonable doubt in the states case. They only need 1 juror and I think they could get one. I think the defense poked holes in the computer searches, with one expert claiming 84 choloroform searches and the other just one. The RK testimony showed he tampered with the remains, yet none of the CSI's said anything about the remains looking like they had been recently touched or moved. The whole Dr. Vass testimony is questionable as far as the way they conduct their tests compared with certified forensics labs. The SA did not show motive (I know they don't have to but it would have helped). The defense had an FBI expert say the duct tape at the scene did not match the tape at the Anthonys home. The was a hair found on the remains that didn't belong to any of the Anthony's or CSI's. I could go on and on, but my opinion is that the state's case left a lot of doubt itself and the DT did poke holes in some of what they did have. They did not tie the defendant to a murder, IMO.

" I think the defense poked holes in the computer searches, with one expert claiming 84 choloroform searches and the other just one. "

On rebuttal they will show that Cindy was lying about doing those searches herself. And they will also clear up the discrepancy between those two software programs. So, imo, there will be solid evidence that Casey made those searches and then deleted them when Yuri arrived for his investigation.

"The RK testimony showed he tampered with the remains, yet none of the CSI's said anything about the remains looking like they had been recently touched or moved."

' Tampered' with? Those remains had been tampered with by a typhoon, and rain and heat and insects and wild animals and heavy winds for six months. So how is poking it or prodding it going to be noticed by a CSI? That makes no sense, sorry. Besides that, what difference did it make? It was a skeleton, in pieces, spread across the dump site. How did anything Kronk do affect any
autopsy findings or evidence? It didn't. imoo

"The whole Dr. Vass testimony is questionable as far as the way they conduct their tests compared with certified forensics labs."

The state does not even need any of the Vass testimony. With or without him there was plenty of evidence that Caylee was decomposing in that trunk.


"The SA did not show motive (I know they don't have to but it would have helped). "

They will bring that out in their closing. By then it will be more obvious to the jury as well. They have had enough time to see Casey every day close up. Motive=Casey was spiteful and hateful and she also wanted her freedom. That is a deadly combination.


"The defense had an FBI expert say the duct tape at the scene did not match the tape at the Anthonys home. The was a hair found on the remains that didn't belong to any of the Anthony's or CSI's."

If the duct tape didn't match then why is the DT going on and on about 'follow the duct tape' and George put duct tape on the gas can. ?

And that random hair in the dump site means nothing. That entire place was full of trash and the body had been there for 6 months and under water and the elements. That hair is not nearly as important as the one in the trunk with the deathband.

 

[RevMSwain]

That's why I say Common Sense will make the decision for them. No matter what the defense throws out there the jury will use common sense and logic to make they're decison. Common sense tells me the evidencethe prosecution is showing makes more sense then the evidence or lack of that the defense is throwing out. Tape on mouth, smell in car, no reports of her missing chlorform searches ect put it all together and it proves murder. I don't think the defense have proven anything that supports their theory of events. JMO

Let's remember that not all juries use common sense. Anyone remember the oj simpson trial? I didn't think anyone could find him not guilty, but they did! Of course, his defense team was elite compared to ca's team! Let's all party that they see though the dt's smoke and mirrors routine and come back with the right verdict to show there nation that there is justice for Caylee!

 

[Nova]

Let's remember that not all juries use common sense. Anyone remember the oj simpson trial? I didn't think anyone could find him not guilty, but they did! Of course, his defense team was elite compared to ca's team! Let's all party that they see though the dt's smoke and mirrors routine and come back with the right verdict to show there nation that there is justice for Caylee!

BBM: Dear Rev. Swain, I would like to join your church. I think the world has many problems and I would like us to party for each of them.

(Please forgive me for pointing out a typo. I make them all the time, but this one was just too delicious.)

 

[Nova]

I never had reasonable doubt, really, though I have joined others in defending the right of people to have reasonable doubts without being called idiots.

And I still feel the same. But if I were a juror, the ice-cold expression on KC's face as her father fell apart on the stand, grieving for HER dead daughter, would erase any doubt whatsoever that I had.

I know: that isn't evidence and shouldn't be part of my decision process. And I'm certainly a person who thinks of himself as more logical than emotional.

But that ice-cold expression as her father disintegrated on national TV was truly chilling! As far as I'm concerned, KC not only killed her daughter just to spend the evening with her boyfriend, she probably killed Jon-Benet, Jimmy Hoffa and Lizzie Borden's parents, too!

 

[shadowraiths]

But if I were a juror, the ice-cold expression on KC's face as her father fell apart on the stand, grieving for HER dead daughter, would erase any doubt whatsoever that I had.

Quite understandable. Unfortunately, that is exactly the sort of thing that occurred in the case of Lindy Chaimberland. And, in fact, that case stands as a landmark with regard to why determining guilt (or innocence, for that matter) based upon presentation poses a problem.

That said, I personally, think there is something neurologically wrong with Casey. The rather fantastic stories she weaves in conjunction with her flat affect is absolutely striking. And this presentation notably contradicts the photos of she and Caylee as well as reports from friends that she was a loving mother.

As for whether or not the defense has raised reasonable doubt? Imo, they have shown there are all sorts of inconsistencies, to include the question of why LE did not find Caylee the first time RK called, to the foreign DNA issue on the duct tape. Even so, and imnsho, whatever reasonable doubt they may have initially raised, they subsequently quashed with their preposterous story of RK allegedly finding Caylee and keeping her remains for 6 months for an elevated reward.

 

[Hopeful One]

Not a chance. JB turned every DT witness into a SA witness. They made fools of themselves, IMO. In his opening statement, my ears perked up. But ever since, the state's case has gotten stronger and stronger.

 

[Pollywog]

No I don't think reasonable doubt even tho JB tried it and thought that was what he was doing. I doubt she will take the stand unless she is stupid enough to think she can lie her way out "just one more time".

 

[gxm]

All JB does it make me more and more convinced that ICA murdered Caylee. With his latest debacle, all JB did was prove, to me at least, that ICA buried her pets better than she "buried" her little girl. JB really needs to sit down and keep his mouth shut. It's unbelievable how he keeps validating the SA's case!

 

[GeekyGirl]

I never had reasonable doubt, really, though I have joined others in defending the right of people to have reasonable doubts without being called idiots.

And I still feel the same. But if I were a juror, the ice-cold expression on KC's face as her father fell apart on the stand, grieving for HER dead daughter, would erase any doubt whatsoever that I had.

I know: that isn't evidence and shouldn't be part of my decision process. And I'm certainly a person who thinks of himself as more logical than emotional.

But that ice-cold expression as her father disintegrated on national TV was truly chilling! As far as I'm concerned, KC not only killed her daughter just to spend the evening with her boyfriend, she probably killed Jon-Benet, Jimmy Hoffa and Lizzie Borden's parents, too!

I always appreciate your thoughtful posts... Thanks for not calling me an idiot.

The defense did reinforce a few doubts I had, though I think it was all quite by accident on their part. I still think the chloroform is a bit of a stretch, two blurry dots ~5 months apart just aren't enough for me. If the state could give me something, anything that ties her to making chloroform in June then okay, but for now, I just don't buy it. I totally believe that Caylee was in Casey's care when she died, and totally believe her body was in that trunk. I think she's definitely git some sort of Axis II disorder (NPD, APD etc.) and is capable of murder, but I also think that if there was an accident of some sort, her first response would be to think of herself and not Caylee (hence no 911 call). A lot of people have said she would have gotten sympathy for an accident, but because I don't think she's capable of empathy, I don't think she could accurately predict how people would have reacted to her.

So, Manslaughter, yes... waiting on the rebuttal for my final call on the murder charge.

MOO

 

[LinasK]

I sat as judge & jury 3 years ago reading docs & viewing media. Most of on-going trial watched in bits & late night summaries. My analogy would be, "Reading the book & then watching the movie". Doesn't mix well at all.

So I say ... the facts are out there. All the key points. There is too much detail. Too much adds to confusion. Those who don't agree on guilty cannot see the story from all sides. As for 1st degree & death penalty, too many bleeding hearts out there who can't believe things like that happen without a good reason.

As for me, I can't believe she met afterwards with Tony & then drove around so long with Caylee in the trunk until it stunk! Now this alone is grounds for a conclusion to killing without remorse.

F.Y.I., I'm a "Bleeding Heart Liberal" who believes it was Premeditated Murder on Casey, and Casey alone's part and that she should receive the Death Penalty!!!

 

[Nore]

No they did not.

 

[Anais]

Let's remember that not all juries use common sense. Anyone remember the oj simpson trial? I didn't think anyone could find him not guilty, but they did! Of course, his defense team was elite compared to ca's team! Let's all party that they see though the dt's smoke and mirrors routine and come back with the right verdict to show there nation that there is justice for Caylee!

Big, huge difference between the O.J. case and this one! First and foremost the O.J. DT was allowed to jury shop and get the exact set of jurors they wanted. Second HHLI allowed the trial to run something akin to a side show circus of freaks! Lastly the O.J. case was during an extremely difficult time where the sentiment was anger and distrust at LE due to the Rodney King incident and riots in L.A. Unfortunately Mark Furhman didn't help matters at all with the O.J. case and it's handling.

In this case we've had an excellent CJ with HHJBP at the helm of this trial. He is very thorough and runs a tight ship leaving nothing to chance. Lastly imho JB and the rest of this DT has done a miserable job while representing their client for capital murder. They have opened doors that should not have ever even been cracked which led to more evidence nailing their client coming in. All I have gotten from this DT is a whole lot of confusion, a whole mess of contradictory statements etc., and what we all knew at the beginning-ICA comes from a severely dysfunctional family who lie a whole lot. Despite those lies imo these jurors will see past them to the unbelievable and incredible emotional testimony given and ultimately convict her of Caylee's murder.

I personally do not believe that she will get the death penalty however.

 

[Nova]

Quite understandable. Unfortunately, that is exactly the sort of thing that occurred in the case of Lindy Chaimberland. And, in fact, that case stands as a landmark with regard to why determining guilt (or innocence, for that matter) based upon presentation poses a problem.

I know you're right and I would come to my senses before actually passing judgment. But that was my honest and immediate reaction to what I saw on TV yesterday.

Actually, I almost always argue for ignoring affect evidence because I come from a family of morticians who react (or rather, don't react) to death and grief in ways that strike others as odd. I have no faith in anyone's ability to predict what is a "normal" reaction.

I did have a visceral reaction to KC yesterday, however.

That said, I personally, think there is something neurologically wrong with Casey. The rather fantastic stories she weaves in conjunction with her flat affect is absolutely striking. And this presentation notably contradicts the photos of she and Caylee as well as reports from friends that she was a loving mother.

I also don't make much of these reports from friends. The test of a "loving mother" is how she behaves when no one is watching.

As for whether or not the defense has raised reasonable doubt? Imo, they have shown there are all sorts of inconsistencies, to include the question of why LE did not find Caylee the first time RK called, to the foreign DNA issue on the duct tape. Even so, and imnsho, whatever reasonable doubt they may have initially raised, they subsequently quashed with their preposterous story of RK allegedly finding Caylee and keeping her remains for 6 months for an elevated reward.

I agree, but in fairness, stupid defense theories are no more evidence than the affect of a defendant when not on the stand.

You and I would both have some things to set aside if we were deliberating.

 

[Nova]

I always appreciate your thoughtful posts... Thanks for not calling me an idiot....

It would never cross my mind to call you any such thing!

On the contrary, I very much respect your level headed approach to this case.

I too think it's a no-brainer that KC was somehow responsible (even if only through negligence) for Caylee's death.

But without a cause of death, I'm not sure I can know which of the charges would apply.

And, in theory, the jury has to agree on a charge as it is specifically defined. It isn't supposed to be good enough to say, "Well, she did something, so we'll give her manslaughter unless the State can prove a higher charge."